A Hungry Puppy is a reader who just wants to explore good fiction. A Hungry Puppy has little or no interest in philosophical debate or personal controversies. The idea of recommending a story for a Hugo because its science fiction approach is allegedly being neglected doesn't make sense to me. By the same standard, the idea of dismissing a story for consideration because the author or the people who recommended it are flawed or outright bad doesn't make sense to me either. The history of speculative fiction is littered with unenlightened, flawed, and outright bad people. A story should be judged strictly on its merits. If you consider a story worthy of a Hugo, write or solicit a review. If you consider a story unworthy of a Hugo, write a review. If you disagree with the direction of award X, instead of waging guerilla warfare against another section of the speculative community, instead of making the claim that a certain trend is ruining the speculative genre (what a feat that would be!), launch award Y, assuming there are enough fans of your subgenre to support it, with prerequisites defining what you consider true/quality speculative fiction. Same with launching magazine Y. If you're going to write an editorial, instead of demonizing the pioneers of or spokesmen of subgenre X, explain why you support subgenre Y, offer examples of subgenre Y stories, and make your case from a literary standpoint. Plenty of subgenres don't resonate with me, but they resonate with the fanbase of that subgenre. I might not share your taste, but I respect your taste. Speculative is a big umbrella, more power to you. I notice a trend toward placing value on vivid storytelling over meaningful stories, but somebody's reading those stories or those stories would be consigned to the slushpile. I place greater value on the science premise than most sci fi fans, but my literary heroes consider the characters the supreme element of the story. Instead of bloodletting and flaming, let's enjoy and discuss - and yes, debate - good fiction. Thus is the perspective of a Hungry Puppy.

Interesting comments by fictionmuse. I think the people he may have been commenting on are reacting to a certain agenda by others. This conflict is a wider societal conflict that has arisen the last few years which has slipped into writing. And Fictionmuse, you may have slightly contradicted yourself at one point. I will have reread that section to make sure I understood it right.

I am usually a hungry puppy but lately sometimes I avoid stories with a certain purpose. I read one recently about a time traveling camera-it again took pictures it had taken something like 50 years earlier. The story was well written but there was an agenda there. Or so I felt from the subject of those pictures.

Perhaps this is overly simplistic, but I believe the culture wars are a generational thing. Specifically it's the Boomer generation who has taken politics to the level of personal identity. Don't get me wrong, the Xers and the Millenials have been sucked into the conflict as well, but the Xers wage it halfheartedly and the Millenials just like to troll the Boomers into apoplexy because it amuses them.

After this latest election though... perhaps this conflict has reached it's farcical climax and we won't see 50 and 60 somethings shouting at each other at showings of Hamilton too much longer.